Of course, this reasoning relies on the correctness of the results of [1]} concerning candidate anomalies. I am convinced that these results are correct. However, I understand that some reader may have doubts concerning these results and may not be willing to go through all the admittedly (but inevitably) rather complex derivations in [1]}. Therefore I shall outline now that and how
one can conclude that there is no candidate anomaly of the form of (REF ) without using the more sophisticated results of [1]} by showing that one can derive this conclusion
already by techniques and results that are well-established in local BRST cohomology, namely the descent equation technique, contracting homotopies to eliminate “trivial pairs” (also called “contractible pairs”), properties of the Koszul-Tate differential contained in the BRST-differential, and standard Lie algebra cohomology (cf. [4]}, [5]} for reviews), in combination with the cohomology of an operator \(\delta _-\)  outlined below. Again, for this reasoning the mass dimension of the integrand of (REF ) is crucial because it implies that the more sophisticated results of [1]} are not needed to conclude that there is no candidate anomaly of the form of (REF ).
